Click to expand In my opinion, the ear simulator is not necessarily a better or worse representation of the human ear, but it will help you understand the high frequency response of your DUT in a better and easier way. I don't yet know of a way of producing THD measurements from a smartphone, but REW has the ability to measure the noise floor prior to its log f sweep, and from the frequency sweep phase data, the ability to pick up the lagged harmonic components which can be plotted for each harmonic, or summed to a total, up to a maximum of the 9th harmonic.
Note that the smoother appearance of the stepped-sine results below is due to the use of only 3 points per octave. This is the same headphone Xelento measured by both approaches using a coupler and condenser mic, plotted with THD normalized with respect to the fundamental:. THD or total harmonic distortion represents the sum of all harmonics that are triggered by the fundamental; N, or noise, typically just refers to everything else.
So, N could include noise floor which might rise or modulate with gain , intermodulation distortion, electromagnetic interference, the dog barking nearby, etc. N is often represented in terms of a signal to noise ratio or SNR, which is a number that can be used to mislead. For example, it might not be all that relevant that your system can reach dB SPL if you listen at much quieter levels - and at those quieter levels you're bothered by a noise floor.
That's, arguably, kind of cheating - because it means any distortion or noise components lower or higher than 1 kHz in other words, everywhere are going to be damped, regardless of the fundamental. Of course, this leads to better-looking specs though Also, it's very common to only report results from a single sinusoid typically, 1 kHz , and often without any mention of the voltage or SPLs involved.
This doesn't tell you what sort of N you'd perceive in real music - not even if your favored genre were Concerto at 1 kHz, or Rhapsody in 10 minutes of B5.
N might be exacerbated by the headphone sensitive IEMs are more susceptible to hissing , but none of the sources of N can usually be attributed to a fault of the headphone or IEM itself. For electronic equipment, measuring N or SNR is challenging because the measurement equipment needs to be better than that of the DUT and one really needs to take into account the effect of A-weighting.
An extract from AES 6. It includes all harmonic, inharmonic, and noise components. NOTE This characteristic is also known as signal-to-noise ratio. The test signal shall be a Hz sine wave with a level of dB relative to the maximum input level see 6. The output of the EUT shall be filtered with the standard low-pass filter see 5.
The output of the standard notch filter shall be filtered with the standard weighting filter see 5. The rms level of the final filter output shall be measured. The dynamic range shall be the ratio of the maximum output level see 6. Spoiler: Measuring Headphone Impedance Another very cool and useful thing you can do with REW is to take measurements of headphone impedance versus frequency.
To do this, you need a special cable that forms a circuit like this: In my cable, the right channel of a 3. I left the solder contacts open so that it can easily be measured or shorted to calibrate within REW:. Spoiler: Earbuds This one may stoke some controversy, because obviously earbuds aren't sealed in the ear canal and so their response will depend to some extent on the outer ear too. But there's an even bigger problem with earbuds, which is the enormous shift you can get in low-frequency response by adjusting the tiny gap between ear and earbud - even marginally.
This can be impacted by geometry of the tragus and antitragus, and even the thickness of the foam used if any. This makes measuring earbuds really challenging. I built myself a temporary outer ear from moulding putty around the coupler and simply ensured that each bud was lying completely flat against the opening.
Last edited: Oct 15, Joined Jul 2, Posts 9, Likes 4, I'm glad you didn't end up destroying stuff just to get worst results. I guess we could argue for years about personal preferences in setting up the measurement, placement of the IEM, objective references. I personally started just trying to get a more accurate FR to set up my EQ. I'm not talking about the IEMs doing their thing and reaching their respective limits.
TBH I scared myself a little while testing the output I could use, I made sure the IEMs had specs telling it was ok to go above , dB, but I didn't think about the mic, so I didn't really insist once I noticed how that upper freq bump might be the mic itself anyway it was pure curiosity, I have no interest in testing high SPL, 90dB is already on the higher side of my own listening habits.
I'm not sure that's the only explanation, or even an explanation though. I also added a new section added on impedance measurements, which shouldn't be too controversial - this is all standard stuff. What might raise an eyebrow at least, it was a bit of a surprise to me is an addition to the section on obtaining repeatable measurements. I found one particular headphone the KSE that has rather large variations in FR as you push the volume towards its maximum.
Last edited: Feb 6, Hi and first of all thanks for your thread! Really great information! I bought the cheapest avaliable solution, the Dayton IMM-6 microphone and experimented with 3D printed couplers.
The first one is a simple tube with same inner dimensions as a coupler, but without any side chambers, just the tube, microphone on one side and cone for IEM tip on the other. Then I designed a multi-part 3D printed coupler as closely as possible to the coupler design.
I am attaching the images of the design and measurements for the Kanas Pro from Moondrop. The measurements show first the KPE reponse from headflux. The second graph shows the green curve measured with the Dayton IMM-6 with simple tube, and the orange cruve measured with the multi-part coupler.
I am aware that the multi-part coupler needs more optimization, especially since the resonance chambers don't seal well against the outer shell, but the 2 observations so far are: The kHz peak measured by the simple coupler matches the reference measurement very well, and aside from the sub-bass drop the low frequencies also follow the reference well, but are higher.
Beyond 5kHz the simple coupler shows strong peaks and valleys, obviously resonance effects. Yeh, it is common for other sites to praise products despite poor objective performance.
Mar 19, Tyll took measurements, related them to reality, and gave his impressions. Does not do that. It's more like a story that gives you a certain feel for the 'audiophile article' aesthetic more than data. Glad some measurements are being done though. You must log in or register to reply here. Similar threads B. Stereo and Multichannel Amplifier Reviews. Post your DIY equipment measurements here!
Started by anchan Sunday at PM Replies: 5. DIY Audio Forum. Comes with a small upper treble spike and lacking raw resolution. Surprisingly competent for a decades-old set.
Midrange is a little uneven but beats out many other modern TOTLs. Focal Radiance. Probably the best of the closed-back Focals.
Some tuning refinements over the Stellia, though technically limited. The original Hifiman. Midrange is a little too scooped out but remains competitive even today. An even darker HD6X0. A comparatively muffled mess just barely propped up by its decent resolving ability. Certainly a "mini-HD" in terms of tonality only, however still far inferior in technical ability. Denon AH-D The usual "Foster biodyna dynamics" are at play here, with a somewhat fatiguing treble spike. Kennerton Odin.
Generally "okay" tonality with some odd dips here and there. Lacking serious extension for a planar. Kennerton Thror. Kind of a "nothing headphone"; not bad, not great, just good enough to be okay. HarmonicDyne Zeus. Sennheiser Momentum 3 Wireless. A massive improvement over its predecessor. Limited resolution and potentially intense tonality. Focal Clear Mg. Subdued upper midrange with the odd treble spike makes this a weird headphone to listen to.
Definitely the least Audeze-sounding Audeze. A little quirky tonally, but nothing too offensive. Hifiman HEi Meze Empyrean. Bland and unexciting tuning with compressed staging and generally underperforming technicalities. Pretty bog-standard V-shaped response with forward upper-midrange and decently high resolution. Sivga Phoenix. A fairly competent warm-neutral monitor slightly held back by limited detail retrieval.
Audeze LCD A slight tonal improvement over the LCD-4, but also comes with a slight hit in resolution. Audeze LCD-X Tonally, a massive improvement over the previous version s though with the usual pitfalls of the Audeze house sound. Needs a little more upper midrange to balance out the honkiness. Good dynamic performance especially in the bass. The most neutral of the M-series. Good tonality but still suffers from narrow imaging. Sennheiser HD25 Plus. Punchy, energetic sound with decently balanced tonality.
A pretty good beat-tracking monitor. Beyerdynamic DT Pro Balanced pads. An intense sound given its significant treble boost, but countered by a smooth lower-midrange bump. As a gaming headphone, possibly the best technically though with the usual pitfalls of the Audeze house sound.
Basically a darker planar HD6X0, with equally closed-in staging and lacking the final resolving edge. Audeze LCD-2 Classic. Classic Audeze combo of solid resolution with a confusing lack of upper midrange.
Koss KSC Non-existent sub-bass and poor resolution. But it's so well-tuned you may not even care. Audeze LCD-2 Closed-back. Not the worst Audeze in terms of tonality, but its tuning still doesn't live up to its technical capabilities. Apple AirPods Max. Great tonality, sub-focused bass emphasis, bassy without being muddy. Average imaging and resolution. Middling technicalities, but for a gaming headphone its tonality is surprisingly balanced.
ES Lab ES-1a. Seems inspired by the tuning of the SR with some minor improvements, though not enough to call it "good". ZMF Verite Pref. Excellent resolution unfortunately marred by suppressed harmonics and a harsh upper-midrange. Well-balanced tonality with disappointing detailing and claustrophobic imaging. A very well-tuned monitor-style headphone, if heavily bottlenecked by narrow imaging and blunt hits. Tonality is somewhat off with peaks and dips here and there, but overall not a bad sounding headphone.
Timsok TS Acoustic Research AR-H1. A tempered, almost bright-leaning planar but not quite. Decent tonality and technical ability. Sizeable mid-bass bloat that's barely reigned in by an equally sizeable upper-midrange emphasis. Beyerdynamic T5p 1st Gen. Choppy midrange response is its biggest turnoff, but otherwise a decent V-shaped headphone. GU1DO said:. Click to expand Joined Feb 17, Posts Likes How would your curves be applied to something like Viper4Android?
Would you just use the parametric EQ setting provided? Last edited: Aug 14, Can I get the target response curve used to eq super-imposed on the innerfidelity graph for the HD? I'm asking how the target eq compares to a flat line on the inner fidelity compensated top graph. The red and blue lines? Those are the result of applying the old compensation curve to raw microphone data and the old compensation curve is very far from what is considered neutral.
I'll judge myself what is and isn't neutral since I know what I want from a headphone. But my reference for comparison is the flat line on the the inner-fidelity graphs and I presume most people judge headphones compared to that, inner-fidelity graphs are the standard. So, last time: what's the difference between flat on the inner-fidelity graph and your eq target?
If the compensation curves are different, it's the difference between the two compensation curves. Last edited: Aug 15, Ok, I was a bit impatient.
Type aiii improved, jon iverson stereophile, rubinson weighs in, rockport sirius iii, a triumph tamil, vmr phono cartridge, studio 10 loudspeaker, minimum phase filters, lot of fun, från senaste stereophile, reclocker audiostream, video like this, damping factor test, visited jade design, die for stereophile